4.5 Review

Dietary amelioration of Helicobacter infection

Journal

NUTRITION RESEARCH
Volume 35, Issue 6, Pages 461-473

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2015.03.001

Keywords

Anti-inflammatory; Cancer; Gastric; Helicobacter; H pylori; Stomach; Ulcer

Funding

  1. Lewis B. and Dorothy Cullman Foundation
  2. National Cancer Institute [CA 93780-03]
  3. New Zealand Foundation for Science, Research and Technology
  4. Comvita New Zealand, Ltd.
  5. Brassica Foundation, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We review herein the basis for using dietary components to treat and/or prevent Helicobacter pylori infection, with emphasis on (a) work reported in the last decade, (b) dietary components for which there is mechanism-based plausibility, and (c) components for which clinical results on H pylori amelioration are available. There is evidence that a diet-based treatment may reduce the levels and/or the virulence of H pylori colonization without completely eradicating the organism in treated individuals. This concept was endorsed a decade ago by the participants in a small international consensus conference held in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, and interest in such a diet-based approach has increased dramatically since then. This approach is attractive in terms of cost, treatment, tolerability, and cultural acceptability. This review, therefore, highlights specific foods, food components, and food products, grouped as follows: bee products (eg, honey and propolis); probiotics; dairy products; vegetables; fruits; oils; essential oils; and herbs, spices, and other plants. A discussion of the small number of clinical studies that are available is supplemented by supportive in vitro and animal studies. This very large body of in vitro and preclinical evidence must now be followed up with rationally designed, unambiguous human trials. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available